Wednesday, June 16, 2010

Archvillains for Wonder Woman

I read an interview today from a director who said that the problem with Wonder Woman is that she has no perfect, recognizable arch-villain. She has no Joker or Lex Luthor. I have said the same thing many times myself, but this leads to the question... who could be or should be Wonder Woman's arch-nemesis? So here is my analysis of some of Wonder Woman's current villains or other villains from the DC universe who might make a good match for her.

First, a few of the best examples from her current rogue's gallery:

Cheetah

Who is she? In her original incarnation, Cheetah was Priscilla Rich, a debutant and socialite who suffered from a deep-seated inferiority complex. After having an emotional breakdown, she starts dressing as a Cheetah and then... I don't know. Steals things? Tries to kill people?

This character was changed in the eighties to Barbara Ann Minerva, a British heiress and archeologist who is ambitious, greedy, and neurotic. She goes to Africa and finds a tribe who worship the cheetah and grant her with "cheetah powers." Whereas the original Cheetah was a woman in a Cheetah costume, the current version is a bit more of a "were-cheetah."

What works? I like the idea of that she is a product of upper-class society. She seems trapped by it and in that way, she is a caged animal, much like a cheetah in a zoo. This idea of domestic captivity in supposed luxury really resonates from a feminist stand point, so I like the original interpretation because it makes Cheetah sympathetic.

What doesn't work? The latter interpretation, by making her greedy and ambitious, she isn't sympathetic. She is just a bitch and there is nothing fun about that. But the big reason why I think Cheetah doesn't make a good arch enemy is because her symbolism does not contrast well with Wonder Woman. As an animal-themed villain, Cheetah seems like she should be fighting some animal-themed hero. As a mythological hero, Wonder Woman seems like she should be matched with a similarly mythic villain.

What could work better? I think the current Barbara Ann Minerva version of Cheetah should be set aside and the Priscilla Rich version should be reintroduced. She has a strong origin in her character, but no one has really explored the causes and unique nature of her psychosis. A delusional woman would make a really good counterpoint to the "spirit of truth." Can even the golden lasso help cure self-delusion? Early Wonder Woman comics had a theme of criminal reform and Cheetah could be the focus to explore that again.

Circe

Who is she? The chick in the Odyssey who turned Homer's crew into pigs. She is an immortal enchantress in the DC universe with a fetish for turning people into animals.

What works? She has a similar theme in common with Wonder Woman in that they are both mythic women of power with connections to the Greek pantheon. Unlike Cheetah, Circe is not deluded but quiet intelligent, so you will often see her as the master planner behind the stage.

What doesn't work? She was ripped wholesale from the Odyssey. There is a big difference between characters who were inspired by historical mythology and those who come straight out of it. Wonder Woman was inspired, but she clearly fits in the superhero world. For me, Thor never quite made the leap into the superhero world, but at least his costume and origin were given a uniquely superhero slant. Circe is just... well, Circe.

What could work better? Basically, Circe just needs more character definition and motivation. I'm imagining a story where she is punished for her hubris by the Gods and loses her powers, then we watch the extraordinary and brutal methods she has of regaining her power. It seems like her character is routed in her need to exert power over people. We've always seen her with power, but it would be more interesting to see how she handles powerlessness. It also works with the themes of submission and domination in Wonder Woman. Maybe we see Circe submit to a dark God or demon, only to usurp their power.

Ares

Who is he? Speaking of dark gods, Ares is the incarnation of war in the Greek pantheon. The original comics didn't clearly distinguish between Greek and Roman gods, so he was originally known as Mars, but in the eighties revamp, Wonder Woman's pantheon was clearly made more traditionally Greek.

What works? As a symbol of war, Ares contrasts Diana's mission of peace. Of course, they also have the commonality of being based in Greek mythology.

What doesn't work? Like I said before, when you just take a character from mythology wholesale, it doesn't work in a superhero context. Ares is the god of war, but what is his motivation? He doesn't need one. He is the incarnation of war. This works for broad metaphorical tales of myth where gods stand for certain ways of living or being. As a symbol of war, Ares is not malevolent, but simply a fact of life. This is the way Greek mythology is interpretted, but superhero confrontations are always about overcoming the enemy. Simple put, you can't just personify war and have Diana beat him into submission because it makes for a very awkward and confusing metaphor; beating war through violence...

What could work better? Again, its tough to say. I think the gods work best when they are not the hero or villain, but rather a state of being that people appeal to. If the gods are scheming, plotting, and then their plots are ruined by the hero, it makes them seem incompetent and less than godly. I think it works better if mortals appeal to the gods for their favor, but then are unable to deal with the consequence. Therefore, it becomes more of a cautionary tale. I don't think Wonder Woman should literally fight Ares. She should hate him, but fighting him is pointless. Her struggle should be with those who beseech him and his power.

Those were the three characters who are currently the contenders for Wonder Woman's arch-nemesis, but here are a few more notable adversaries.

Dr. Psycho

Who is he? Edgar Cizko is a mad dwarf with powers of mind control and an extreme sense of misogyny.

What works? I really like this character. The dwarf (excuse me for not being PC, but I think the word suits this individual character) with wild hair and big eyes seems like he just leaped out of someone's subconscious. As a symbol of misogyny, it also works because he is a small, angry man who feels the need to control women in order to make himself feel powerful. You just position him next to Diana's tall, beautiful, confident Amazonian figure and you can see the self-worth issues radiating off of him.

What doesn't work? The problem with Dr. Psycho is that he just isn't impressive or imposing enough to become a genuine threat to Wonder Woman. In a way, that is good. It allows you to tell the story in a different way, but he is too psychotic to be an intellectual threat to her and too weak to be a physical threat. He works well as an emotional threat, but you need a bit more than that in an arch-nemesis. Furthermore, he is more of a... well, freak than a supervillain.

What could work better? I'd like to see Dr. Psycho as more of a supporting character than an outright villain. I'd love to see him in a more legitimized and untouchable position in Wonder Woman's life so that he is more of a constant threat, much like Lex Luthor is to Superman.

Dr. Poison

Who is she? Originally called Princess Maru (for some reason), Dr. Poison was a fairly simple character whose hooded mask made people mistake her for a man. I'm not sure what the significance of her "crossdressing" was. Probably something about unattractive women gaining power by being more male. Oh, and she poisons people.

What works? The name works and the bondage theme in the outfit really works. The bondage theme calls up associations with the original bondage themes in Wonder Woman. Since it is still not socially acceptable to talk about sexual bondage in mainstream comics, Dr. Poison allows you to explore the psychology of the lifestyle through a villain. The eccentric nature of villains can be useful for exploring complex and uncomfortable ideas. The "poison" aspect of her character makes me imagine her as a frequent drug experimenter, but only with custom designer drugs. It is the extreme nature of this character that really appeals to me.

What doesn't work? She has no other character to speak of. The current incarnation doesn't even have an alter-ego, she is just the granddaughter of the original. The writers haven't really explored her motivation. Her look is frequently haphazard. I don't care for the hideous Joker grin or the black medical scrubs. They seem to be taking the "doctor" part a little too literally.

What could work better? I would go more for the "sexy chemist gone mad" angle. Ben Caldwell did a version of Dr. Poison as a sexy Japanese bondage girl. I'm imagining a story about a brilliant young pharmacologist who likes to take drugs, dress up like a fetish doll, then go cause some trouble. With a little work, this could be a popular spin-off character.

Giganta

Who is she? In the original incarnation, Giganta was a gorilla who was artificially evolved into a beautiful red-headed strongwoman. In the modern incarnation, she was a woman with a blood disease whose mind was put into a gorilla and then later into a woman with size changing powers. Pretty dumb, huh?

What works? The 50 Ft. Woman. Don't ask me why it is a cultural phenomenon, but it is. There is just something incredibly interesting about giant human beings. When it is a giant woman, there is this connotation of a reversal of power that I think we find attractive on a deeply subconscious level.

What doesn't work? The whole origin is dumb... and size changing is a pretty simple trick. There are not a lot of different things you can do with it. Giganta will never be arch-nemesis material, but again, it could work if the audience understands and sympathizes with her more.

What could work better? I would rewrite her origin from scratch. I'm imagining her as a shy, awkward girl whose accidental exposure to something causes her to become powerful, confident, and big. The bigger she gets, the bigger her ego gets and the more entitled she feels. Again, it works because there is strong symbolism there.

I think to find a true arch-villain, it will be necessary to either create a new one (very difficult to do) or appropriate one from elsewhere in the DC universe. Here are a few I would recommend.

Poison Ivy

Who is she? Pamela Isley is a popular Batman villain since the sixties. She is an eco-terrorist with a twisted obsession with plant life. She wants to return the Earth to the control of mother nature. She has no compassion for humans, but is genuinely hurt when witnessing any harm toward plant life... even so much as picking a flower.

Why does she fit Wonder Woman? Like Diana, Poison Ivy is a social activist at heart, but unlike Diana, she lacks compassion and so decends into terrorism. She also has a prominent sexuality including implied lesbianism which should play well against Diana's own sexual ambiguity. Furthermore, her powers over plant life makes her transcend her human roots into virtual godhood. This runs perpendicular to Diana's own arch. Diana is an outsider trying to educate the world while Poison Ivy is an insider corrupted by the world and set to destroy it.

Vandal Savage

Who is he? Vandal Savage was a caveman fifty thousand years ago. After being exposed to a mysterious meteor, he gained superior intellect and immortality. He has since fought to accumulate power and control. He helped to sink Atlantis and formed the Illuminati out of its demise.

Why does he fit Wonder Woman? The main reason is that Vandal Savage is a fantastically imposing character with a rich history, but he doesn't have a heroic counterpart. He was originally created in a Green Lantern comic, but has since appeared in the Justice League, Flash, Superman, and virtually every title. I think it would be the easiest thing in the world to attach him to Wonder Woman. Because he is an ancient, powerful male, he represents and symbolizes patriarchy past and present.

This is the only character I've seen who I can imagine becoming a true arch-nemesis to Diana. Physically, intellectually, and emotionally, he is a challenge to her. He represents something she has been fighting for her entire fictional life... female empowerment versus paternalistic control. Even better, he already has a history and respect within the DC universe, so you wouldn't have to build him up. The only trick would be seamlessly tying him to Wonder Woman in a way that makes him seem like he's always been there.

2 comments:

Unknown said...

I disagree with respect to Cheetah. Look at Batman and the Joker; is not like clowns and bats are mortal enemies. As Morrison did in "Animal-Man" not because a character is animal-themed as to fight an animal-themed oponent (leave that to Spider-man and his "modern jungle" villains). I can clearly see the contrast between Wonder Woman and Cheetah, just as the gods favored Wondy the god cursed Cheetah, leaving her as a reluctant and abused wife. Plus she can work as a dark mirror of Wondy (http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=23187).
My only problem with her is the lack of a good reason, appart from envy, to fight Wonder Woman. I wish Kieron Gillen was the writer of Wonder Woman thought, because he can give good reasons to villains (For example: Sinister from the X-men).

Xav said...

Agree. If anyone were to make a feature film, I can't imagine her (I'm imagining a female director in my ideal world--Kathryn Bigelow maybe) NOT using Cheetah. Also, that rendering of Doctor Psycho already looks like Peter Dinklage, so why not use him too?